C J Morgan

The report we were discussing refers to illegal immigrants: 'European Union refugee policy known as Dublin II requires asylum seekers to apply in the first country they enter'. Where they choose to move on to get a sweeter deal (than Greece or other countries) they are regarded as illegal immigrants.

You have already admitted that some or many of the boat people you speak of are country shopping in choosing to leave their first safe haven of call to come to Australia. Surely you are not seriously suggesting their lives were any more at risk in Malaysia or Indonesia than in their home country? Sure, the conditions and Guvvy support are not as good as in Australia and that is why you say they move on. It is reasonable to assume they wouldn't part with their money to come here on a whim and they do have some knowledge of Australia - just as 'refugees' who choose to go to leave Greece bound for Sweden are well informed and seeking to improve their lot rather than save their (already saved) lives.

How can they be refugees after they reject one safe haven and pursue another. If it is good enough for all of Europe to draw a distinction then so might Australia. Or do you want Australia to end up like Greece?

Antonios, me of all people have made it very clear that really I just am who I am with nothing to hide. It keeps me honest.

I don’t know any other way to be, even on line. All my opinions come from who I am and how I have lived. I wont be hurt by you my friend.

Publicly I can’t be clear what children are with me or anything that could identify them, not safe for them in some situations. On the other hand this very secrecy enables them to be abused within the system. Scary world.

Where’s Belly by the way?

“If it is good enough for all of Europe to draw a distinction then so might Australia.”

And if they jumped off a cliff you would to?

I do wish you'd stop misrepresenting me, Cornflower.

I have not "already admitted that some or many of the boat people [I] speak of are country shopping in choosing to leave their first safe haven of call to come to Australia". Indeed, I have asserted quite the reverse - I have said that asylum seekers who come to Australia by boat from Malaysia and Indonesia are NOT "country shoppers" (as you like to pejoratively label them), since those countries are not signatories to the UN Convention and treat refugees notoriously poorly. They are not "safe havens" by any stretch of the imagination.

Are you being deliberately obtuse, or do you have a problem with English comprehension?

Further, the issue we are discussing is that of asylum seekers who travel to Australia by boat. Your link to a report about illegal immigrants in Europe, together with your comment that "There is no reason to suggest that illegal immigrants act differently in Europe than they do here", is clearly a deliberate effort to imply that the boat people who are the subject of this discussion are "illegal immigrants".

If you have a valid argument there's really no need to be dishonest.

“I PREFER THE PURE TRUTH”

You speak with forked tongue my friend for it's obvious that the purpose of your crusade is to demonise Australians.

I must say you are most fortunate though in your ability to promote your crusade by having two Online pseudonyms where I guess you have one for home use and the other to continue on during working hours – eg. AnSymeonakis and ASymeonakis. Oh for a boss who permits his employees to dabble away on debate forums at his expense! You are indeed privileged.

Further to the link you have provided on “racism” I now provide you with a couple of excerpts on the Sydney survey to which you conveniently referred, to enhance your argument. 1,845 respondents participated in the Sydney survey but you have used the largest mulitcultural area (and the most congested) in Australia to tar the entire nation with the same brush:

“Highest levels of racism by Sydney standards
and recognition of Anglo privilege
occur in several inner western and southwestern
LGAs of lower SES but with high
levels of cultural diversity (group 10); an
above-average number of respondents say
that ‘others are racist and so am I’.

“Significantly, perhaps, these are areas with the
highest numbers of recently arrived immigrants
from Asian and Middle Eastern
countries where contact has not yet led to
intergroup social acceptance and where, on
the evidence presented in Table 4, ethnic
groups are as intolerant as the Australian born.

“Nor is intolerance the preserve of the Australian born
alone, as highlighted by the attitudes of
different birthplace groups to aspects of intolerance
(Table 4). Compared with the Australian-
born, the most intolerant groups are
generally Asians, especially those from
north-east Asia (principally China and Hong
Kong); southern Europeans have quite high
levels of intolerance, surprisingly, perhaps,
exceeding that of Middle Eastern immigrants.

“More specifically, southern Europeans
(mainly from Italy, Greece and the former
Yugoslavia) have the highest level of intolerance
towards racial intermarriage, an aspect of
the ‘old’ racism, with those from north-east
Asia not much more tolerant.”

http://www.uws.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0005/29408/A291.pdf

Pot/kettle? Inciting racial hatred Antonios?

While my PC died the thread moved on.
Just suppose for a second that what CJ Morgan called true refugees, numbered a million
Any time soon we may see such numbers trying to come here.
Most of us have an understanding boat people are not country picking.
We are much shorter and easier than say the USA .
Is it a problem that people wait in dreadful conditions to come here or just have a chance
It is true isnt it boat people more often get to stay than be sent home gatecrashers or refugees its the umbers I see as the problem.
Yes of shore detention is a must, long prison sentences or people smugglers, more of shore refugees taken in.
But far less almost none, of these coming by boat.
Rewarding boat people increases the problems.
The answer must be found in the country's they leave, work, food a life worth living.

That’s the way CJ, when all else fails, resort to your trademark slurs of ‘racist’, ’xenophobic’ and ‘paranioa’, oh and ‘misanthropic’ (In response to your post of 12 July 9.28AM).

Go right ahead and degrade what would otherwise be a reasonable debate. Go right ahead and keep doing what hundreds of posters have criticised you for.

Go right ahead and make sure that you are seen as an unbalanced debater with little substance beyond broad concepts.

Can’t you see that every time you fall back on these slurs, the immediate impression is that you can’t address the issue in a logical manner? The impression is that you’ve been caught out. That’s certainly my impression and it is clearly that of many others on this forum.

The use of the slur tactic is just so very poor. It sits very much at odds with your obvious intelligence, good command of English and ability to entertain sensible, polite and vigorous debate.

And on this occasion you are directing your rubbish at someone who holds views that are really not that far from yours:- I want a considerably increased refugee intake, I want refugees to be treated humanely, while being very mindful of upholding a strong deterrence factor, I want Australia to greatly increase its international aid effort, directed at the causal factors of refugeeism and at population stabilisation and sustainability issues, all of which are very closely related, etc.

How about a reasonable discussion here CJ, between the two of us, who have been pretty amicable correspondents for a long time. No more silly slanderous slurs, or misrepresentations. How about just asking straight questions about points of disagreement, and giving straight answers where asked the same.

.
That’s a pretty reasonable summation Belly.